Ģ��ֱ��

According to the results of the research, the policy objectives for both the Finnish National Forest Strategy and the Bioeconomy Strategy would require that approximately 2/3 of the forests would be managed by practices that include continuous cover forestry regimes and protected areas. The remaining 1/3 of the forest should instead be intensively managed for wood production. On the other side, meeting the Finnish Biodiversity Strategy objectives would require a strong focus on forest protection (50% of forest protected) and entail a reduction in wood and bioenergy production. Compared with the current situation, all policies would mean a considerable change in management, as forestry is currently dominated by even-aged management approaches with final clearcutting.

"More protected areas and continuous cover forestry"

Professor Mikko Mönkkönen points out two important messages to decision-makers if the Finnish society seriously strives to achieve the forest policy objectives: "First, all policies imply more protected areas compared with the current condition in Finland. Second, for sustainable timber production we need much more continuous cover forestry and allow intensive timber production in designated areas."

The study further highlights the inconsistency between –and even within– the national policies. “For the Finnish National Forest Strategy, it was not possible to achieve all stated ecosystem service objectives simultaneously”, says Postdoctoral Researcher Clemens Blattert. To a large extent, this within policy conflict was caused by the dominant timber production target, which particularly hindered forest conservation objectives. The Biodiversity Strategy and Bioeconomy Strategy were instead more consistent in their stated objectives, as these policies tend to be more focused in the specific sector.

Forest multifunctionality emphasised in policies

All analysed Finnish policies emphasised forest multifunctionality. For achieving higher multifunctionality, future policies require however a stronger focus on non-timber objectives as well as support and incentives for forest owners to do so. This is important to consider when new policies are developed, or EU policies are implemented at national level.

For the study, researchers translated the Finnish policy documents into concrete objectives. Then, with a new optimization tool developed together with the company partner Silo AI, they elaborated what is the best combination of managements to reach the objectives separately for each policy. Further, researchers evaluated how such optimal management programs would affect the forest development in the future also considering the effects of climate change.

The study is part of the multinational consortium project MultiForest, which is financed under the umbrella of ERA-NET Cofund  and led by the Boreal Ecosystems Research Group at the Ģ��ֱ��.

For further information:

• Mikko Mönkkönen, Dean, Faculty of Mathematics and Science, Professor in Department of Biological and Environmental Science, Ģ��ֱ��, mikko.monkkonen@jyu.fi, 0504413682
• Clemens Blattert, Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Biological and Environmental Science, Ģ��ֱ��, clemens.c.blattert@jyu.fi

Article's DOI doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2022.102689